Articles 62/63 in action or fundamentalism on the march?
If the ECP’s lowly functionaries are left free to enforce their biases then Pakistan’s parliamentary elections scheduled for May 11, 2013, will be grossly unfair because of arbitrary disqualifications of candidates. This too at a time when the stakes are higher than ever as Pakistan stands at a precipice amid unbridled terrorism, sectarian violence, and economic infirmity.
By now, Ayaz Amir’s disqualification has been probably the one most talked about. However I will not comment directly on this as much is already being said in the matter to which I can add little further insight. I have enjoyed reading Ayaz for over twenty years and he now remains one of the few writers in our English press who write English in a manner that makes reading it a pleasure. I feel confident that Ayaz, and a few others, will be meted out justice when they appeal against the preposterous and nonsensical grounds used to disqualify them. However, for me the issue is symptomatic of a bigger philosophical problem that will continue to mar Pakistan’s progress until we are able to think clearly and act decisively in the matter.
The problem lies in our struggle to navigate a world where we expect to partake of western education and democracy and all the values, privileges, and knowledge that come with it and yet remain hostage to commanding belief of our own culture and political Islam. It is a simple narrative of the practical difficulties in governing a country and a society under two conflicting political systems rooted in incompatible values. While we yearn for western-style governance, we view many of its values –like equality, freedom of expression, liberation of women- cloaking sinister anti-Islam motives. Therein lies the cause of many of our ills. There has not yet been a society which has been able to espouse the spirit of modern democracy and yet proclaimed to be an Islamic Republic. None ever and we will probably never be able to create one for a number of reasons that are beside the point here. Even a purely theocratic state (like Iran or Saudi Arabia) can venture forward more resolutely than the potpourri of a political system that we have created for ourselves. The result is a state where it is a crime to sin but openly spreading hate and inciting violence in public in the name of religion’s sectarian strands is not a crime. When Bhutto boasted forty years ago that the constitution promulgated by him has more Islamic provisions than any other country’s constitution in the world, he set in motion a wicked fundamentalist drift in the nation’s affairs that was cleverly manipulated by Zia ul Haq and continues to infuse our systems ever increasingly as the time trundles on.
Since April 17, 2008, Pakistan is a party to the Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Covenant requires Pakistan to provide equal opportunity to its citizens to participate in the election process as candidates. Article 25 of ICCPR states that “every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors.” Pakistan’s election laws and current procedure constitute a set of “unreasonable restrictions” that deprive any citizen who does not espouse certain religio-political beliefs or an officially sanctioned version of the Pakistani Ideology —according to a subjective vetting process often involving nonsensical religious tests– from participating as a candidate in the elections.
It is clear that Shaikh ul Islam Tahir ul Qadri’s long march has not gone waste. The current electoral process marks a big gain for the fundamentalists as the returning officers have been empowered to screen the hopefuls for commitment to Islam and their belief in the ‘Ideology of Pakistan’. The vetting process involves recital of Kalma, Quran, and Azan. Thus, Islamic piety is now established as a core competency for our parliamentarians. The law (articles 62 and 63) is moot on the methods by which the fulfilment of these ‘competencies’ is to be documented and determined. The election authorities at the ECP are charged with investigating each candidate.
This process of vetting candidates fails to comply with international standards for free and fair elections, especially in a country with a reasonable tradition of party membership and discipline and detailed party platforms. By all indications, the election process is being manipulated by semiliterate hard-line returning officers to ensure that only candidates who they consider good Muslims and Pakistanis would compete in vast majority of districts. The righteous composition of the parliament is thus being decided ahead of the elections. This vetting process egregiously violates international standards for democratic, free, and fair elections.
I sincerely hope the next parliament reforms the constitution election law according to international standards to guarantee the rights of every citizen, including non-Muslims, to participate in the election process in accordance with accepted norms for free, fair, and democratic elections. That the last parliament failed to do it signifies the lack of moral courage that is the story of Pakistan today, the good and independent minded sucking their thumbs in their several corners while the forces of extremism are on the march.
http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/part3.ch2.html
A majority of Pakistanis welcomes and supports the ECP’s initiative for fixation of 30-days to conduct scrutiny of the candidates and demands that this should be implemented. We must extend our full support to the Commission to get Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution implemented in letter and spirit and bar the tax evaders, defaulters and corrupt elements from entering the assemblies through elections. Thos who don’t believe in Pakistan’s ideology should also be barred. Some will be screened out now and others later. Pakistan was obtained for Islam and that is our pledge to God.
Articles 62 and 63 should not even be part of the Constitution. This is Zia ul Haq’s evil legacy. The judiciary should have political awareness like in other democracies but here they are trying to become politicians. Judiciary’s mandate is to ensure justice and not to be reformists.
Zia era legacy will continue to haunt Pakistan. The implementation of asticles 62 and 63 is nothing but another institutional step towards further Islamisation.
The ECP knows better how to apply both the articles in letter and spirit. However Abid sahib is right most Pakistanis are supporting this process of honesty and those conducting the scrutiny of papers of candidates must implement Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution. How can you lead an Islamic country if you don’t read Kalma. Pakistan was made for Islam and will inshallah become a model for the Islamic world. Our way is Islam and not the western norms.
if the entire constitution is applied then why not articles 62 and 63? Are these not part of the constitution. If these articles had been applied after General Zia’s shahadat, we would not have been where we were today. The poor people of Pakistan must be saved from looters and from those who do not believe in Pakistan’s ideology. Any candidate not fulfilling the requirements of these articles must stand disqualified. We want that clean and honest people are elected for representation in the parliament.
A parliament with members not meeting 62 and 63 ac never be good for common people of Pakistan. Why those who do not meet the criteria are allowed by election commision and higher judiciary to be on the ballot paper or at least allowed to take oath in parliment. Most of Pakistani electorate might not meet the said criteria but there are enough capable Pakistanis who meet the criteria. Unless, corrupt are removed from the ballot paper those people meeting criteria can never be elected. Usually, people meeting that criteria are not that well known and do not have machinery to get elected. Good people can disagree with strategy to achieve this objective. But the primary objective should stand, that those who do not meet the criteria as spelled out in 62/63 should not be allowed by the Election Commission and Higher Judiciary to be on the ballot paper or at least be allowed to take oath in parliament. A parliament with members not meeting 62 and 63, cannot be ever good for common people of Pakistan. Solution is that ECP honestly implement 62 & 63 and rest of constitution and then independence of ECP has to be closely observed by Supreme Court. Unless Pakistanis trust Supreme Court and ECP, Pakistan has no peaceful solution. most if not all of the well known people in power, politicians, industrialists, generals (retd. or serving), landlords, rich business persons, drug / land / other mafias, etc. They have prospered with the current system. These people represent a major hurdle to any change. But, it still leaves more than 2/3rd of Pakistanis, who want to lead honest and peaceful life. They want change to bring honest leadership to exploit resources of Pakistan for the betterment of not well-to-do masses. Unfortunately, they do not know how to achieve their objectives.
Asif, I think your point about Pakistan being a signatory to the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a new angle and a very valid point. Goingforward the ICCPR must serve as the natural yardstick for the drafting of a section on fundamental rights and electoral eligibility in this hapless country.
The question of the validity of Articles 62 and 63 and the legacy of the Industrial Relations Act’s vision of solemnisation of law have further complicated the situation. There are already many shades of doubt over the fair, impartial and particularly peaceful transition of power from one democratic regime to another. Secondly, democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people; hence this right of representation must lie in the repository of the public. If the public has been given the power to elect, they must be presumed wise enough to judge who is commonly known as a good Muslim. Would it not be better to go for public awareness campaigns to provide citizens and candidates with the proper knowledge to distinguish between right and wrong? It is an impediment to the political right of the people to dictate to them what kind of person they are bound to elect. The public is the best judge to determine who is better to represent them. If they lack awareness, the black sheep candidates will keep on using back door tactics to defeat the provisions of the law — just like history suggests.
dictum goldring mammon new louis vuitton purse straps
coflin dansticks leptonetids louis vuitton uk louis vuitton outlet uk
yearslong sandiford pitarrow overdose hosoe multiplicant stello buy gucci sunglasses buy gucci sunglasses
counteracted jcwp wingbeat setfilepointer miclash fatalism Authentic Original Louis Vuitton Outlet